I started a plasma wayland session. Confirmed it was wayland session, then killed xwayland- it locked up KDE.No response or screen repaints.
If you run plasma on wayland ( which I don’t since the two of them IME are not ready for eachother ), it neeeds xwayland. If you kill that, you kill the displayserver for plasma, hence your issue.
Is gnome the same way or can I run gnome session without X and Xwayland ? It is strange that KDE pretends to be running with wayland when it is actually using xorg. Other than the xorg dependency, KDE wayland session was quite stable and worked well.
AFAIK wayland still needs Xorg.
wow- at least a decade after it was supposed to replace xorg. It still says on their website that wayland will replace xorg- maybe I won’t be around to see it. Isn’t OSS supposed to move at the speed of lightning on account of “millions of people” beavering away for nothing ? (end of rant).
As a s/w developer, I initially believed in all this in the late 90s when with the internet boom, it looked like a unix clone would finally offer an alternative to windows (it was '95 back then). I came from a unix background as a developer. Well, 2 decades later, that hasn’t happened. Many companies use linux, mostly in the cloud as a web server or in embedded devices. But the closest Unix has come to be a desktop OS is in mac OS which even apple came back from the dead to implement and Linux couldn’t ! The f’ing irony.
In the meantime, MS cleaned up their act with windows 10. When, if ever will linux have a) common packaging b) common repo for all distros ? That would be a start. Then maybe we can have an API driven software model like MS and Apple so successfully implemented (and Ubuntu tried with Mir but was shot down by rabid OSS (read non RH/gnome) NIH zealots). A brilliant idea to replace an outdated protocol driven s/w stack with ANOTHER protocol driven s/w stack by wait for it, the same developers ! Am I amiss in saying that congress gets more done ?!
end of another rant.
AFAIK, Gnome doesn’t require xwayland support at all (although some legacy xorg apps may require the compatibility layer of course).
Wayland is a complete window system in itself, but even so, if we’re migrating away from X, it makes sense to have a good backwards compatibility story.
https://wayland.freedesktop.org/xserver.html
Regarding packaging, you could say that’s the “downside” of freedom. Your “right way” might not be mine. My “one-size-fits-all” solution might be inferior to your “even-better-one-size-fits-all” solution, but then maybe my project is currently more “robust”, has more “momentum” and a bunch of developers that aren’t ready to just throw the whole project off a cliff. And what will we all adopt? Snappy, Flatpak, AppImage, ZeroInstall, and why not Zypp/RPM? The OpenBuildService seems nice. ;-]
There are still many applications that depend on Xorg. So xwayland is needed to support them.
For example, I prefer “xterm” over “konsole”. But I doubt that anybody is working to adapt “xterm” to Wayland. At some time, I will probably have to give up on using “xterm”, but that time has not yet arrived. I’m using “Amarok” for music playing, and that probably still depends on X. I’m not sure about “firefox” but it would not surprise me to learn that it depends on X.
Yes, there’s a few misinformed ideas in the OP’s rant (and they don’t really belong in this help thread).
I’m not sure about “firefox” but it would not surprise me to learn that it depends on X.
I’ve just been researching this because of deano_ferrari’s link.
Both Chrome and Firefox use XWayland
about:support in the firefox URL entry shows brings up a page that shows “Window Protocol: x11”
You don’t need Firefox nightly. The stable version 66.0.3 works fine with wayland. What you do need to do is set the environmental variable for it to work with wayand. You can either launch firefox with “env GDK_BACKEND=wayland firefox” or else define the variable for your system. For that, you will want to use “MOZ_ENABLE_WAYLAND=1”.
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=246179
The first option gives an error and firefox doesn’t load. I tried putting export MOZ_ENABLE_WAYLAND=1 in “~/.bashrc” but that didn’t seem to change anything.
It looks like maybe you need to compile it with support. https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/firefox-wayland/
> Do we need to use: ac_add_options --with-gl-provider=EGL if we apply this
> patch?
EGL backend is enabled by default on Wayland build so you don’t need to use this option.
I guess whatever environment that is being used to build the opensuse package is using x11.
Edit: Created new thread to not hijack this https://forums.opensuse.org/showthread.php/536942-Firefox-and-Wayland
It turns out that GNOME Classic uses x11. >_<
I switched to “regular” GNOME and now it shows “Window Protocol: wayland”
Yes, it does.
On Leap 15.1, SLE classic uses Wayland but Gnome classic uses X11. On Tumbleweed, they both use X11, but I think that’s a change with Gnome 3.32. Probably SLE Classic has not yet been fully integrated into Gnome 3.32.
For others who may also not yet be aware…openSUSE Leap documentation…
https://doc.opensuse.org/documentation/leap/gnomeuser/html/book.gnomeuser/cha.gnomeuser.start.html
GNOME (default)
A GNOME 3 configuration that is very close to the upstream design. It focuses on interrupting users as little as possible. However, starting applications and switching between them works differently from many other desktop operating systems. It uses a single panel at the top of the screen. This session is started on Wayland.
GNOME on Xorg
By default openSUSE Leap uses GNOME with Wayland. Choose this option to start GNOME on Xorg.
GNOME Classic
A GNOME 3 configuration that is designed to appeal to former users of GNOME 2. The desktop has two panels, one at the top and another at the bottom.
SLE Classic
The GNOME look and feel that was used on SUSE Linux Enterprise 12. This desktop is a GNOME 3 configuration and uses a single panel that is placed at the bottom of the screen. This session is started on Wayland.
@mvaar in post 5,
That is exactly what I have been saying for years and years but I always get the answer: No, Linux is all about choices. We need 1000+ distro’s, 10-20 different desktop environment systems, I don’t know how many different software systems, we need all of that.
I wish smart people who are in charge of different distro’s would finally come together and discuss how to proceed in the making of ONE Linux, one to rule them all.
Just as soon as they do that, you will start to complain about something that you don’t like. So you will create your own distro. And then there will be two distros. And, before long, there will be many.
In any case, there is one distro to rule them all. It is called “openSUSE” 